idle-priority: OWL R1

mirabilos eccesys at
Sun May 6 08:40:22 UTC 2001

----- Original Message -----
From: "Karsten M. Self" <kmself at>
To: <license-discuss at>
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 8:42 PM
Subject: Re: idle-priority: OWL R1

>Note that the responses you receive from this list, while not
>necessarily those of the OSI board itself, are likely to be fairly
>strongly consistent with the board's own decision and/or actions.  I
>haven't seen any on-list challenges to any of the objections or
>criticisms I'd made previously.  This is a group that tends to discuss
>disagreements freely, I'd tend to assume a general state of agreement
>with my views (and invite comments from anyone differing with this

>You appear to be looking for a content (text or other non-software
>works) license.  Several are published, including those of the Free
>Software Foundation and the Open Publication License.

No it just _can_ be applied to any work. For me it's mainly assembly
source code software, BASIC, some C. Also it covers HTML and font files.
It soon will cover a Win32 SMTP/POP3 server (in C).

>I'm not as familiar with this area of licensing as I am with software,
>but my recommendations are the same:

>  - Look at the existing license space.

>  - Identify how existing licenses do or don't meet your needs.

They don't.

>  - If you must write your own license, take the task seriously.  At
>    least, get professional legal input appropriate for your
>    jurisdictions, and take translation to other languages seriously.

I've jumped over from GPL, LGPL and BSD/MIT in order to ensure that
some parts of it are near to others. And I don't see where it doesn't
conform the current OSD.

>  - Present your case clearly, concisely, and logically to the
>    license-discuss list using the guidelines I'd provided previously
>    list mail on this topic.

>Again:  this is a volunteer organization.  It moves slowly.  Many
>members believe that license proliferation is a bad thing.  You're
>asking a favor of the readership, not the other way around.

>Incidentally, the formatting of the document at the link listed above
>still leaves much to be desired.

You got no linebreaks, right? (Damn tripod)
Use (for IE) Edit->View Source. Notepad has the right 2048 bytes of it,
and even the checksum matches.


No other license has this "verbatim" vs. "original" thing (as an
to Section 4 of the OSD). And many of them are either huge (*GPL) or
are usually - do they really need? - included in every file.
The OWL just needs a line such as
 Copyright (c) blah... included herein by reference: OWL_rel1.ASC
And I ship the file(s) with it.
That's the font mentioned above, an extension to the standard CP437
font of an ancient Trident TVGA8900. It's binary, .FON (Win), .PSFU
and ships with a special German keymap for linux.

Ok, if you don't want, it's not so bad, I just thought...
I may have seen it to easily. But hey, tell me where it
contradicts the OSD??


More information about the License-discuss mailing list